-by Patrick Toomey
As of this writing, there are reasons to, at last, feel a sense of optimism about an election that cannot be over soon enough. Trump’s October surge appears to have crested, he has spent the campaign’s final week looking even more unhinged than usual, and a Des Moines Register poll shows Harris leading 47-44 in a state that was conceded to be in the GOP column. Admittedly, there is an Emerson poll showing Trump up 10 in Iowa.
Even assuming that Trump does carry Iowa by, say 3-4 points (roughly splitting the difference between these polls), that would portend poorly for him in swing states like Michigan and Wisconsin. It also raises questions about the actual strength of Trump’s support nationwide.
The curious point about the latest Register poll is that the same poll showed Harris well within striking distance in September:
The findings suggest a shift toward Harris compared with the previous Iowa Poll, in September, which found a narrow edge for Trump. In that poll, 47% of likely voters backed Trump to 43% for Harris.
There has been little other high-quality polling in Iowa thus far this cycle with which to compare these findings. Iowa has a mixed record in the last four presidential elections, breaking for Barack Obama in both 2008 and 2012, while Trump won it in 2016 and again in 2020.
Iowa has as many electoral votes (6) as highly-contested Nevada has. The Register poll is considered to be the gold standard for Iowa polling. The Harris campaign is flush with resources. Tim Walz is from a neighboring state and he would have natural appeal on the stump in Iowa. It’s not an expensive state to contest— Des Moines is the only halfway major TV market.
It wouldn’t have taken a major investment for Dems to expand the map by contesting a state that Obama carried twice. Failing to contest it this year was not as obvious of an error as HRC 2016 not knowing that Michigan was in play until the campaign’s final weekend and that Wisconsin was in play until she lost that state. It was, however, a clear oversight by Team Harris.
In 2016, HRC was a bad candidate who ran a worse campaign. In 2024, Harris is a mediocre candidate who has run a mediocre campaign. She made an excellent VP choice in Walz. She coalesced party support around her once Biden (belatedly) dropped out. She cleaned Trump’s clock in their one debate.
On the flip side, she offered thin gruel to economically struggling voters. Her eagerly welcoming the Cheney Clan’s support was politically and morally mistaken. Like the past two Democratic nominees, she ran against Trump the man instead of running against MAGAism the ideology. A GOP Congress enacting Project 2025 is as big of a danger as Trump seizing power is, yet that danger has never really been made clear to voters.
It remains hard to believe that a convicted felon (with 3 other pending indictments) who fomented insurrection is running as the “law and order” candidate and largely getting away with it. It’s equally difficult to believe that millions have a positive view of a presidency whose misfeasance and malfeasance caused the needless Covid deaths of tens of thousands of Americans. It’s hard to believe that Elon Musk, Trump’s virtual running mate, openly acknowledged that their economic plan would tank the economy “in the short term,” yet Trump retains strong marks on the economy.
Others can argue as to how much of this abject failure can be attributed to poor media coverage, to an often incoherent opposing campaign, and to the voters themselves. A failure of that magnitude likely has multiple causes. The fact remains that this election should not be close at this stage.
No one still really knows what Harris stands for at this stage. She clearly supports the “national security” state across the board. Whether she’ll do anything meaningful on the climate crisis is an open question. Whether she will keep the likes of Lina Kahn and continue Biden’s relatively decent domestic record or whether she’ll dump Kahn and go the Mark Cuban neoliberal economic route is also an open question. I’m not even sure that she herself knows the details of her highly touted plan to fight grocery price gouging.
We all, however, DO know what Trump and his party stand for. They want to kill off, once and for all, the very concept of a federal government that actually serves the common good. They want to conduct a dangerous power grab. They want a “Game Over” on the climate crisis.
My expectation is that we will be narrowly spared this dystopian future. Beyond that, I have few other expectations. We presumably will live to fight another day, but we still will have a major fight on our hands if the Teflon Don is finally dragged off the public stage.
Great summary. Kamala must win first. Step by step after that. Bernie is the greatest. He’s the real deal.
"No one still really knows what Harris stands for at this stage."
Ugh. Nonsense. Not helpful. Please. Stop.
Her Medicare At Home plan to help family caregivers in desperate need of relief is something she stands for. She also wants to restore the Child Tax Credit and the Earned Income Tax Credit. She said at a campaign rally in Atlanta GA, “When Congress passes a law to restore reproductive freedoms, as president of the United States, I will sign it into law,”.
You're welcome.